Industry profile · NAICS 221320

Collection, treatment, and disposal of waste through a sewer system

Workplace injury rates across 437 OSHA-reporting establishments in this industry, 2016–2024.

437
Employers
5.5
Avg TCR
1.2
BLS benchmark
6,559
Injuries

The industry picture

Employers in Collection, treatment, and disposal of waste through a sewer system average 5.5 recordable injuries per 100 workers, 4.6 times the BLS national benchmark of 1.2.

5.5
avg TCR · reporting employers
1.2
BLS national benchmark
437
employers reporting
6,559
recordable injuries

OSHA-reporting establishments skew toward larger, higher-hazard sites, so the reporting average runs above the BLS all-establishment benchmark.

What Collection, treatment, and disposal of waste through a sewer system Safety Data Reveals

The Collection, treatment, and disposal of waste through a sewer system sector (NAICS 221320) encompasses 437 distinct employer establishments currently reporting to OSHA's Injury Tracking Application. Across this cohort, workers have logged 6,559 recordable injuries during the 2016–2024 reporting window, producing an industry-weighted average Total Case Rate (TCR) of 5.5 injuries per 100 full-time workers per year. Because OSHA's ITA mandates submission from establishments with 250+ employees plus all high-hazard industries at 20+ employees, this dataset represents a structural slice of U.S. workplace risk rather than a voluntary sample.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes a separate national benchmark TCR of 1.2 for this NAICS code, derived from the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses. Comparing the two, the ITA-reported rate of 5.5 is higher than the BLS benchmark, a gap that typically widens when the industry contains many large, high-exposure establishments required to file ITA reports. Employers in the table below are sorted so you can see how far individual establishments deviate from both the industry average and the national benchmark.

The practical value of industry-level safety data is threefold. First, jobseekers can gauge whether a prospective employer is better or worse than its industry peers, not just absolute injury counts, which tilt toward larger payrolls. Second, insurers and workers' compensation carriers use sector TCR as a baseline for experience-modification adjustments. Third, safety professionals benchmark their own programs against the cohort median. Use the grade-sorted employer list below to identify specific establishments within Collection, treatment, and disposal of waste through a sewer system that outperform or underperform the sector average, and click through to each record for year-by-year injury, illness, and fatality breakdowns.

Employers in this industry, by injury rate

Page 7 of 9
Employer LocationGradeAvg TCR
Forsyth Project Suwannee, GA D 2.1
R+B Group, Inc. Houston, TX D 2.1
Groveland, FL Groveland, FL D 2.1
Seneca Wastewater Treatment Plant Eagan, MN D 2.1
Hilltop Wastewater Treatment Plant Kingman, AZ D 2.1
Burbank Burbank, CA D 2.1
Village of Addison - Sewer Department Addison, IL D 2.0
Novato Sanitary District Novato, CA D 2.0
Lake Stevens Sewer District Lake Stevens, WA D 2.0
Greater New Haven Water Pollution Abatement Facility New Haven, CT D 2.0
Kuwahee WWTP Knoxville, TN D 2.0
Harbor Labs - Public Utilities San Diego, CA D 2.0
5759_12563 Gary, IN D 2.0
Jacobs - Rio Rancho - OMI Rio Rancho, NM D 1.9
Jacobs - FAYETTEVILLE - OMI Fayetteville, AR D 1.9
SKFCSD Kingsburg, CA D 1.9
Mount Holly Municipal Utilities Authority Mount Holly, NJ D 1.9
Augusta Project Augusta, GA D 1.9
Plaquemines Parish Belle Chase, LA D 1.9
Utilities - Sewerage Systems Chesterfield, VA D 1.8
Village of Glen Ellyn - Glenbard Wastewater Glen Ellyn, IL D 1.8
Jacobs - NORTH HUDSON SEWERAGE AUTHORITY - OMI Hoboken, NJ D 1.8
Lakehaven Water & Sewer District Federal Way, WA D 1.8
Austin (Operations & HOA) Austin, TX D 1.7
Warren Facility Water Reclamation Plant Laboratory Carson, CA D 1.7
Douglas Project Douglas, GA D 1.7
Scranton Wastewater Treatment Plant Scranton, PA D 1.7
Renewable Water Resources Greenville, SC D 1.7
Loudoun Water Wastewater Ashburn, VA D 1.7
Genesee County Water Treatment Plant Flint, MI D 1.7
Southern Development and Construction Oviedo, FL D 1.6
Neabsco Maintenance Facility Woodbridge, VA D 1.6
Manson Meads Complex Winston-Salem, NC D 1.6
Upper Occoquan Service Authority Centreville, VA D 1.6
Astbury Water Technology, Inc. Indianapolis, IN D 1.6
Milwaukee Jones Island Milwaukee, WI D 1.6
Alexandria Renew Enterprises Alexandria, VA D 1.6
H2O innovation Operation & Maintenance LLC - Pascagoula O&M Pascagoula, MS D 1.6
Jacobs - Live Oak - OMI Live Oak, FL D 1.6
Winder Project Winder, GA D 1.5
Kingwood WWTP Kingwood, TX D 1.5
Jacobs - ONTARIO - OMI Ontario, OR D 1.5
San Gabriel Valley Field Office West Covina, CA D 1.5
Westmoor Building Sugarland, TX D 1.5
Water Reclamation Facility Holland, MI C 1.4
Jacobs - PEMBROKE PINES -OMI Pembroke Pines, FL C 1.4
H2O innovation Operation & Maintenance LLC - Northeast O&M Claremont, NH C 1.3
Jacobs - WATERBURY - OMI Waterbury, CT C 1.3
Wastewater Treatment of Louisiana Prairieville, LA C 1.3
Flagg Creek Water Reclamation District Burr Ridge, IL C 1.3
← Prev Page 7 of 9 Next →
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainSafetyScore Editorial

Verify with BLS →

Verify with OSHA →

Working in Collection, treatment, and disposal of waste through a sewer system?

This sector averages 5.5 against a BLS benchmark of 1.2 - but individual employers span the full A-to-F range.

Sector figures use the credible-subset mean across reporting employers; a benchmark is not any single establishment's measured rate.

Every figure and grade on PlainSafetyScore is computed directly from OSHA's published Injury Tracking Application data and BLS industry benchmarks, no number is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these safety grades, or report a data error. Data current as of 2016-2024 OSHA ITA release.